Wright Brothers, Wrong Story: How Wilbur Wright Solved the Problem of Manned Flight

“A good biography needs a hook.” Kindle p. 149. Does it? I don’t think so. This biography definitely has its hook: Wilbur Wright was a lone inventor, genius, visionary, Orville was a mechanic, wrecked Flyers, killed Selfridge, wrote himself into Fred Kelly’s official biography as Wilbur’s equal, lied to aggrandize himself, Kelly went along. All others biographies of the Wrights except this one are the “Wrong Story.” Notice Kindle p. 257: “You cannot have co-authors. Not really. ... The visionary alone is the indispensable one.” Sounds like author arrogance and desire for a catchy book title and thesis, to sell books, created this book’s hook. Still, reading nearly everything written of the Wrights, most of it is too whitewashed, sappy, agog, out of touch with the workaday realities that achieved flight. This book is not any of sappy, etc., thank goodness, finally. And this book takes flight and reaches the lyrical at times. So buy it, read it, enjoy it. But accurate telling? No. With all the citations to source materials, for example, placing the Great Dayton Flood in 1914, In a chapter name as well as chapter text, no less, when all other sources place it in 1913, speaks to wholly inadequate attention to accuracy. The thesis that Orville backfilled his way into inventorship over the decades, and author Kelly was complicit to get his biography published, Kindle p. 246, is also belied by the patent application the brothers wrote and filed for themselves in 1903, right after their 1902 glider flights that proved the success of their system of flight. They named both of themselves as inventors.

Much new and correcting information

nm,nm

In order to create his version of the Wright story, accusing Orville Wright of rewriting history after Wilbur’s death, the author had to completely ignore the published words of Wilbur Wright that directly contradict his two cornerstone fabrications.On the third page of his narrative, Wm. Hazelgrove says Orville Wright exaggerated the story of the importance of the Wright brothers shared childhood interest in flight, entering it into a document years after Wilbur died (pg.11). However, in 1908 a very much alive Wilbur Wright collaborated with Orville on an article published under their byline for the Century magazine. It described in great detail their childhood experience with the toy helicopter that fueled their interest in flight. Hazelgrove lists the Century article in his bibliography (indicating his awareness of it), but he doesn’t reference it in the book. Also, the innumerable publications, newspapers and magazines (100s), re-telling the toy helicopter story up to the time of Wilbur’s death in 1912, belie Hazelgrove’s bizarre allegation that it was surreptitiously exaggerated and injected after Wilbur died.On the fourth page, Hazelgrove says that Orville had no part in the study and contemplation of wing warping, calling it, “The most egregious example of Orville’s heavy editorial hand” (pg.12). However, in a published speech to the Western Society of Engineers in 1901, Wilbur said that he and Orville mused over how to mechanically replicate the twisting of bird’s wings, which led them to wing warping.In his 1901 speech Wilbur said (of Lilienthal’s 1896 death), “The brief notice of his death which appeared in the telegraphic news at that time aroused a passive interest which had existed from my childhood and led me to take down from the shelves of our home library a book on Animal Mechanism. From this I was led to read more modern works, and as my brother soon became equally interested with myself, we soon passed from the reading to the thinking, and finally to the working stage (see McFarland pg.103).”By contrast, in his book Hazelgrove cites (pg. 135-6) Wilbur’s speech in this way, “The brief notice of his death which appeared in the telegraphic news at that time aroused a passive interest which had existed from my childhood and led me to take down from the shelves of our home library a book on Animal Mechanism.” In Hazelgrove’s very next sentence he writes, “The interesting part of this admission is there is no mention of his brother’s interest.” Wilbur’s words from that speech, on his brother’s involvement, were grounded (buried) by Hazelgrove, and replaced with an antithetical fabrication of his own making. It’s only the tip of the iceberg. This book is replete with deceit.Hazelgrove uses the two false statements in the first four pages of his book as the foundation to prime the reader for his rancorous portrayal of Orville Wright, manipulating his way to a tale of his own fabricated fantasy.If anyone is left with any further uncertainty regarding Hazelgrove's scheme, consider this quote by Wilbur Wright from 1912: "From the time we were little children my brother Orville and myself lived together, played together, worked together and, in fact, thought together. We usually owned all our toys in common, talked over our thoughts and aspirations so that nearly everything that was done in our lives has been the result of conversations, suggestions and discussions between us." These words, directly from Wilbur Wright lips, render Hazelgrove's fictional theme disgraceful.

Well researched and very logical, this book "connects the dots" to explain how Wilbur did "the heavy thinking." and Orville injected himself, because he could, after Wilbur's death. Having read David McCullough's recent, and very good book, I could see the author's reasoning and correlation of all the facts. Today, I understand that Wilbur Wright conquered powered flight, with some help from his family.

Very good Stories about the brothers and the projet they are knowed.

THANKS

Lots of (too much) detail asserting what most people agree on. Could have been better with better editing and less imagining what the Wrights were thinking.